Posted on 12/08/2012 2:24:39 PM PST by NYer
Do Catholics worship Mary? This question is as old as the Protestant Reformation itself, and it rests, like other disputed doctrinal points, on a false premise that has been turned into a wedge: the veneration of Mary detracts from the worship of Christ.
This seeming opposition between Mary and Christ is symptomatic of the Protestant tendency, begun by Luther, to view the entirety of Christian life through a dialectical lens – a lens of conflict and division. With the Reformation the integrity of Christianity is broken and its formerly coherent elements are now set in opposition. The Gospel versus the Law. Faith versus Works. Scripture versus Tradition. Authority versus Individuality. Faith versus Reason. Christ versus Mary.
The Catholic tradition rightly sees the mutual complementarity of these elements of the faith, as they all contribute to our ultimate end – living with God now and in eternity. To choose any one of these is to choose them all.
By contrast, to assert that Catholics worship Mary along with or in place of Christ, or that praying to Mary somehow impedes Christ’s role as “the one mediator between God and men” (1 Tim 2:5) is to create a false dichotomy between the Word made flesh and the woman who gave the Word his flesh. No such opposition exists. The one Mediator entrusted his mediation to the will and womb of Mary. She does not impede his mediation – she helps to make it possible.
Within this context we see the ancillary role that the ancilla Domini plays in her divine Son’s mission. Mary’s is not a surrogate womb rented and then forgotten in God’s plan. She is physically connected to Christ and his life, and because of this she is even more deeply connected to him in the order of grace. She is, in fact, “full of grace,” as only one who is redeemed by Christ could be.
The feast of Mary’s Immaculate Conception celebrates the very first act of salvation by Christ in the world. Redemption is made possible for all by his precious blood shed on the cross. Yet Mary’s role in the Savior’s life and mission is so critical and so unique that God saw it necessary to wash her in the blood of the Lamb in advance, at the first moment of her conception.
This reality could not be more Biblical: the angel greets Mary as “full of grace” (Luke 1:28), which is literally rendered as “already graced” (kecharitōmenē). Following Mary, the Church has “pondered what sort of greeting this might be” for centuries. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, ultimately defined in 1854, is nothing other than a rational expression of the angel’s greeting contained in Scripture: Mary is “already graced” with Christ’s redemption at the very moment of her creation.
Because God called Mary to the unique vocation of serving as the Mother of God, it is not just her soul that is graced, as is the case for us when we receive the sacraments. Mary’s entire being, body and soul, is full of grace so that she may be a worthy ark for the New Covenant. And just as the ark of the old covenant was adorned with gold to be a worthy house for God’s word, Mary is conceived without original sin to be the living and holy house for God’s Word.
Thus Mary is not only conceived immaculately, that is, without stain of sin. She also is the Immaculate Conception. Her entire being was specifically created by God with unique privilege so that she could fulfill her role in God’s plan of salvation. “Free from sin,” both original and personal, is the necessary consequence of being “full of grace.”
Protestants claim that veneration of Mary as it is practiced by Catholics is not biblical. St. Paul encouraged the Corinthians to “be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). Paul is not holding himself up as the end goal, but as a means to Christ, the true end. And if a person is imitated, he is simultaneously venerated.
If we should imitate Paul, how much more should we imitate Mary, who fulfilled God’s will to the greatest degree a human being could. Throughout her life she humbled herself so that God could be exalted, and because of this, Christ has fulfilled his promise by exalting his lowly mother to the seat closest to him in God’s kingdom.
Mary is the model of humility, charity, and openness to the will of God. She allows a sword to pierce her heart for the sake of the world’s salvation. She shows us the greatness to which we are called: a life free from sin and filled with God’s grace that leads to union with God in Heaven. She is the model disciple, and therefore worthy of imitation and veneration, not as an end in herself, but as the means to the very purpose of her – and our – existence: Christ himself.
God’s lowly handmaiden would not want it any other way.
Did Jesus exist before Jesus was born of Mary???
Show me where in Scripture it says that. Each angel was created by God to serve the will of God. Each angel has intelligence and will, and each is a personal and immortal creature. Each angel is a unique being who has chosen to love and serve God, its Creator. It is a being who will never die. One third of all angels rebelled against God and were cast out. Beyond this, no human can make any other categorical statements about all angels.
We do not know the number of species of angels nor each of their purposes. One can no more say that angels are omnipresent than one can say they are not.
Peace be with you
metmom; mgist; raptor22; victim soul; Isabel2010; Smokin' Joe; Michigander222; PJBankard>
You might want to check that again, because I and quite a few other people get pinged along with you.
That question denies an understanding of the hypostatic of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis. This too settled in support of the case against Nestorius at the First Council of Ephesus. This council recognised this doctrine and affirmed its importance, stating that the humanity and divinity of Christ are made one according to nature and hypostasis in the Logos. The divine nature of Jesus existed from before the beginning of time. The human nature of Jesus began when He was conceived by the Holy Spirit in Mary's womb.
Peace be with you.
When Jesus takes us up at the Rapture, then all "their" problems will be solved and they can continue here as if "we" never existed. Something tells me they STILL won't be happy about it....wonder why?
So what?
Who cares?
If it's a matter not connected to one's salvation, we have clear instruction from Paul on it in Romans 14.
Romans 14:1-12
As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11 for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”
12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.
The Catholic church can't even keep its catechism the same, much less interpretation of Scripture, even when they do get around to offering one. It certainly is in no position to cast stones about consistency in interpreting Scripture.
Each Protestant ey? How about each Catholic that votes for canidadates who vote for abortion? How about gay Priests? How about the Kennedys? How about the thousands maybe millions of Catholics who want same sex marriage? Any of those “hold his or her own interpretations and doctrines”?
I contemplated responding to this for some time and have decided to weigh in. I have to object to what you posted. While much of Protestantism may be objectionable, the group as a whole are fine and decent Christians. The Church recognizes them as our separated brothers and sisters.
Goodness and evil can be found within any collection of people and Protestants are no exception (and neither are Catholics). The passions of their debate, like those of many Catholics, may evoke behaviors and statements that, with 20/20 hindsight, make us all cringe, but with few exceptions we have all been guilty of excesses in defense of what we consider holy. Let's remember that we are all sinners and are called to both repentance and forgiveness.
Peace be with you
One is either in Communion with the Church or is not. There are no shades of gray.
Peace be with you
OK, let me try that again. I will type really slowly for you since reading comprehension seems to be an issue for you.
I am not on narses' ping list. I have never asked to be on her ping list. I do not get pinged to Catholic threads by narses.
The post to which you are referring is post number 2433, which was a response to my post 2,428. Of course my name was the first of the bunch of other names she pinged to because FR software, by default, puts the name of the person whose post someone is responding to in the *To:* field. In order to not have it show up, that name has to be deliberately removed. In order for other names to show up, they have to be deliberately added.
Now, when narses posted a reply to my post 2,428, my name did indeed show up as FR software was written to do.
All the other names were then added.
That does not mean that I am *on a Catholic ping list*. It means that in a post made by narses (post 2,433) responding to a post of mine (2,438), others are on a Catholic ping list were also pinged.
Trying to insist that because of that, that I am on a Catholic ping list is not correct. Nor is the claim that I am on a Catholic ping list.
How do your continued attacks on Catholics and the Church jibe with that? I would encourage you to reread Philippians 2:12 and not be so concerned with mine.
Peace be with you
Reread the post. When it's matters not connected with salvation.
Philippians 2:12-13 12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
It doesn't say to work it out to earn it. Salvation is possessed by the believer, who is being conformed to the image of Christ, and it ain't done by staring at paintings.
The Catholic church teaches salvation by works. The death of Jesus on the cross is not enough. *It is finished* is not enough.
To Jesus death the RCC adds the need to be baptized, go to confession, be absolved by a priest, take communion, do good works, *be in communion* with the Catholic church, IOW agree with its teachings.
On again, off again salvation depending on how your week or day went.
Way too much added on to simple justification by grace through faith in Christ.
The tax collector at the Temple was justified by throwing himself on the mercy of the court, so to speak, by throwing himself on God's mercy. The Pharisee was all proud of what he had done to earn it. Guess who Jesus said went away justified?
The one without the works and religious duties and obligations.
As far as things like this thread, Scripture is plenty clear on bowing down before images. Our objections are that doing so imperils one's soul because of the potential for being lead astray before coming to Christ. It's a dangerous road to walk teaching things not found in Scripture as truth because of opinion (which is basically what tradition is). It is far too easy for those who don't know any better to be led astray before coming to a knowledge of the truth.
Additionally, for those who really are believers, it is still something they have to answer for if they choose to disobey God in an area in which His has clearly and plainly made His will known. It's far better to ditch the disobedience before standing before God than to continue in it and have to explain to God why you kept doing it.
Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Sin grieves the Holy Spirit. Good enough reason to avoid it in my book, and anything written in the Ten Commandments is pretty important to God.
If you want to mess with it, nobody is stopping you, but there may be others out there who didn't know that they are sinning when they bow down to images.
So, just what does *being in communion with the church* entail?
Does that mean agreeing 100% with the CCC?
OK, what is the official stand on hell? Is someone who doesn't agree with that in communion or not? Does that mean if someone doesn't agree with the church position on hell as stated in the CCC, that they aren't in communion and therefore are not saved?
What's the official position on Limbo? Is someone who doesn't agree with that in communion with the church? Does that mean if someone doesn't agree with the current official position of the RCC on Limbo, that they aren't in communion and therefore are not saved?
What's the official position on Mary (as if I have to ask)? Does that mean if someone doesn't agree that Mary was perpetually virgin, that they aren't in communion with the church and therefore are not saved?
What about the immaculate conception? That if someone doesn't believe that she was immaculately conceived and remained sinless, that they are not in communion with the church and therefore are not saved?
Nice post.
“Goodness and evil can be found within any collection of people...”
Even further, goodness and evil can be found within every individual human heart.
sitetest
I concur with both of your posts, sitetest and Natural Law.
Each new morning of my life I pray to the Lord:
Enlighten my mind
Sanctify my lips
Purify my heart
This is all I ask of Him.
It’s rather common knowledge to anyone who has studied scripture. Never has an angel appeared in more then one place at a time. Satan is not omnipresent nor are any of the other angels.
Matthew 4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
Matthew 4:11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.
Job 1:7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
Many verses in scripture tell of angels traveling to different places.
Can you imagine the horror of having been told over and over but denying to suddenly realizing that you were wrong and remembering all of us telling them now understanding the consequences?
Neither are there any verses that say that angels ARE omnipresent.
Course, it seems to be pretty sensible to conclude that a created being cannot be omnipresent. They may be capable of traveling through space and time as different rates from us earth bound humans, but that doesn’t make them omni- anything.
You are free to your own speculations and extrapolations on that matter because Scripture neither affirms nor denied whether all angels or any one angel is omnipresent. It is certainly within God's power to make it happen.
Peace be with you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.